The .XXX Domain Arrives, to a World That Has Moved On

The vast majority of .XXX URLs resolve to this screenshot, if they resolve at all

After 11 years of controversy, the .XXX domain name went on general sale last week. Meant to give pornographic sites a specific home on the internet, it was finally approved earlier this year.

Since the ICM Registry proposed the .XXX generic top-level domain (or gTLD) in 2000, supporters of the idea have gone through a roller-coaster of proposals, rejections, resubmissions, approvals and attacks. Meanwhile, the world has seen unlikely extremes unite to oppose a porn-only domain name, like the Bush administration, conservative groups, free speech advocates and the porn industry itself. Conservative politicians and activist groups were predictably upset at legitmating pornography; the porn industry and free speech advocates opposed the gTLD due to fears of censorship.

Prior to last week, the domain has only been available to limited buys in a “sunrise” period, first to established XXX merchants and then to non-porn companies looking to protect their brand names. This part of the sale has already been a PR disaster. Besides fears of censorship, detrimental legislation or being blocked by a firewall in homes or businesses, most successful porn sites have invested too much in their established .com identities. The .XXX suffix only promises to reduce traffic, while doing little to add anything. Besides being premium real estate, a .com address means that people who wouldn’t search for a porn site will find them anyway on accident (like hotmale.com or whitehouse.com, for those who are typo-prone). Why would they want to give that up?

It’s also been reported that universities like Kansas and Michigan and corporations like Pepsi and Nike are buying up any .XXX names that could be associated with theirs, so that they won’t be sullied by the name or an uncontrolled startup in the future. According to ICM, around 80,000 (of the 200,000 total addresses) .XXX names were bought in this early sunrise period, the majority of which will never be used.

This is what Stuart Lawley, the head of the ICM Registry sponsoring the .XXX gTLD, calls a “one-time block.” It’s a new arrangement for gTLDs. The .XXX gTLD is supposed to create a “more responsible space,” says Lawley. With a special dispensation from ICANN, ICM was able to take these names out of circulation without charging the normal annual fee. Registrants still have to go through the sunrise process and pay ICM a $200 registration fee and have their trademark validated.

Still, critics of the .XXX gTLD see the whole affair as an unfair revenue grab. The Association of National Advertisers and other business groups worry that the proliferation of gTLDs (including .XXX) could lead to a whole new round of domain squatters — unless established businesses preemptively pay up. Manwin Licensing, the operator of Playboy’s websites, and Digital Playground, a pornographic movie studio, are suing both ICM Registry and ICANN, claiming ICM is unfairly overcharging (10 times the amount of the .com name) for use of the TLD.

Lawley defended the higher price to Wired, arguing that it paid for the creation of the brand and trademark database and supports antivirus and secure micropayment systems built in to each website. ICM has offered to share its registry data with ICANN to help create a “trademark clearing house” for each new gTLD. Had such a database been in existence before the launch of .XXX, Lawley says, the one-time use registries may have cost only $20.

Even ICM’s Lawley, however, is worried that other gTLDs, rolling out beginning in early 2012, may be used by companies seeing more income potential in getting institutions to sign up defensively to pay continued fees.

The FTC’s letter warns that a proliferation of new gTLDs, without a corresponding boost to ICANN’s compliance office and a complete and accurate whois registry database, could lead to “dramatically increased opportunity for consumer fraud.” (ICANN did not immediately return a phone call requesting comment.)

The question is whether a new top-level domain on the open web is the appropriate vehicle to provide these services. Back in 2000, or even in 2004 when the .XXX gTLD was resubmitted, a premium domain name made more sense — it was the primary web currency. But in the age of Google, Tumblr, Facebook and abounding App Stores, this just isn’t the case any more.

The .XXX domain seems like it’s trying to build the web into something it isn’t: a highly regulated safe space.